Connect with us

Features

Securing public trust in public office: A Christian perspective – Part II

Published

on

A file photo of a Constitutional Council meeting.

This is an adapted version of the Bishop Cyril Abeynaike Memorial Lecture delivered on 14 June 2025 at the invitation of the Cathedral Institute for Education and Formation, Colombo, Sri Lanka.

(Continued from yesterday)

The public are entitled to expect their public servants to be intrinsically committed to the truth. From a consequentialist perspective, to secure public trust, public office must be oriented towards justice. Public officers ought to lend their mind to responding to the injustices that they can address within their mandate. This is precisely what Lalith Ambanwela did. His job was to audit the accounts, which he did truthfully and thereby revealed injustices. If he had paused to worry about the risks involved or if he had wondered whether he could have rid the entire system of corruption, the obvious answer to that would have stopped him from taking any truthful action. Rather, he responded to the injustice that he saw, in a truthful manner, thereby improving the trust the public could have in his office.

Notwithstanding the Ambanwela example, one may still ask, in a place like Sri Lanka, what is the point in a single public official being truthful in a context where the problems are institutional, systemic, generational and entrenched – such as corruption or abuse of power? Many of us are familiar with the line of reasoning which suggests that there is no point in being truthful as a single individual, at any level of public service- there will be no impact except for trouble and stress; that one person cannot change systems; that one must wait for a more suitable time; that one must be strategic; that one must think of one’s children safety and future; and that one must be cautious and not attract trouble. Women, in particular, are told – do not be difficult or extreme, just let this go because you cannot change the world.

This is where we come back to the intrinsic justification for truthfulness and a Christian perspective helps us understand the need to cultivate such an intrinsic motivation. The commitment to truthfulness, the Christian faith suggests, is not subject to whether the consequences are palatable or not, as to whether you may be successful or not, but rather, regardless of those consequences. But to sustain such a commitment to truthfulness, I think we need a nurturing environment – a point which I do not have time to speak to today.

Before moving to the second attribute, which is rationality, I want to mention a few other points that I will not be dealing with today. We need to acknowledge that there can be different approaches to discovering the truth and there can be, at least in some instances, different truths. This is reflected in the fact that we have four Gospels that account for the life and ministry of Jesus, reminding us that pursuing the truth has its own in-built challenges. Furthermore, truth is inter-dependent with many other attributes, including trust and freedom.

·

1. Rationality

I now turn to rationality, the second attribute that I think is necessary for securing public trust in public office. In public law, which is the area of law that I specialise in, rationality is a core value and a foundational principle. In contrast, it is fair to say that religion is commonly understood as requiring a faith-based approach – often considered to be the anti-thesis of rationality. However, the creation account in the Bible suggests to us that we were created in the image of God and that at least one of the attributes of human nature is rationality. Furthermore, it has been argued that even Science, generally considered to be a discipline based on rationality and objectivity, is also ultimately based on assumptions and therefore on belief. A previous lecture in this lecture series, by Prof Priyan Dias, explored these ideas in detail.

In my study of public law and in my own experiences in exercising public power, I have observed, of myself and of others like me, that cultivating rationality and maintaining a commitment to it, is a challenge. The need for rationality arises when we are given discretion. Academics, for instance, are given discretion in grading student exams or when supervising doctoral students. Members of the judiciary exercise significant discretion in hearing cases. In Sri Lanka’s Constitutional Council, the members have discretion to approve or disapprove the nominations made by the President to constitutional high office including to the office of the Chief Justice and Inspector General of Police. As I mentioned earlier, where there is discretion, the law requires the person exercising that discretion to be rational.

How should public officials practice rationality? In my view, there are five aspects to practicing rationality in decision-making. First, public officials ought to be able to think objectively about each decision they are required to make. Second, to think objectively, we have to be able to identify the purpose for which discretionary power has been given to us. Third, where necessary, we ought to consult others and/or seek advice and fourth, we have to be able to resist any pressure that might be cast on us, to be biased. Fifth, we should have reasons for our decision and consider it our duty to state those reasons to the world at large.

Let me say a bit more about these five aspects. When, as public officials, we exercise discretionary power, we ought to cultivate the habit of separating the personal from the professional. In public law we say that we should adopt the perspective of a fair minded and reasonable observer. But we know that our own situations often shape even our very idea of objectivity. For example, if a decision-making body comprises only men, or if a public institution has been only headed by men or has very few women at decision-making levels, objectivity could very well lead to decision-making that does not take account of the different issues that women face. All this to say, that objectivity is not simply the absence of personal bias but a way of making decisions where a public official is committed to taking account of all relevant perspectives and thinking rationally about them. No easy task, but that, I think, is what is required of public officials who seek to secure public trust.

The second aspect to rationality is having an appreciation and commitment to the purpose for which discretion has been vested in us. To do so, as public officials, whether we like it or not, we need to have some appreciation for the legal or policy basis on which discretionary power has been vested in us. You may think that this makes the job easier for lawyers. Well, I can tell you that it has not been uncommon for me to be in decision-making situations where even lawyers do not know or have not done their homework to understand what the law requires of us. Recall here the second example I cited, that of Thulsi Madonsela, the former Public Protector of South Africa. She was very clear about the purpose of her office – to ensure accountability. The rationality of her reports on the excessive spending on the President’s house and the report on state capture, have withstood the test of time and spoken truth to power, rationally.

Permit me to make a further point here. The law itself can, and, sometimes is, unjust or unclear. In such contexts, what is the role of a public official? In Sri Lanka, only the Parliament can change laws. Those who hold public office and who derive power from a specific law can only implement it. But and this is very significant, almost always, public officials are required to interpret the law in order to understand its purpose, scope etc. For instance, in Sri Lanka, the law does not lay down the minimum qualifications for several key constitutional offices. The nomination of persons to these offices is through a process of convention, that is to say practice. In my view, this is far from desirable. However, while the law remains this way, the President has the discretion to nominate persons to these constitutional offices and the Constitutional Council is required to approve or disapprove such nominations. The lack of clarity in the relevant constitutional provisions casts a heavy duty on both the President and the Constitutional Council to ensure that they all exercise the discretion vested in them, for the purpose for which such discretion has been given. To do so, both the President and the Council ought to have an appreciation for each of these constitutional high offices, such as that of the Attorney-General or Auditor General and exercise their discretion rationally for the benefit of the people.

Consulting relevant parties and obtaining advice is the third aspect of rationality that I identified. It is not unusual for public officials to consult or obtain advice. Complex decisions are often best made with feedback from suitably qualified and experienced persons. who will share their independent opinion with you and where necessary, disagree with you. However, what I have observed in my work so far is the following. Public officials who seek advice, often select other public officials or experts who they like, or ones with whom they have a transactional relationship or ones who may not think differently from them. Correspondingly, the advice givers, often public officials themselves, seek to agree and please (or even appease) rather than give independent, subject based rational advice. This type of advice subverts the purpose of the law, bends it to political will and is disingenuous. I am sure, we can all think of examples from Sri Lanka where this has happened, sometimes even causing tragic loss of life or irreversible harm to human dignity.

Permit me to give you a personal example which is now etched in my mind. In November, 2023, the then President proposed to the Parliament that due to the non-approval of a nomination he had made to judicial office, that a Parliamentary Select Committee should be appointed to inquire into the Constitutional Council (The Sunday Times 26 November 2023). Feeling overwhelmed by the prospect of being hauled before a Parliamentary Select Committee while also recalling experiences of some public officials before such proceedings, the day after this announcement was made, I sat at my desk and typed out my letter of resignation (Daily Mirror 23 November 2023). I then rang up one of my lawyers to discuss this. I told him that I am resigning as I could not take what was to come. He responded very gently and made two points: 1) that I ought to not resign and need to see this through, whatever the process might entail and 2) that he and others will stand by me every step of the way. As you can imagine, that was not what I wanted to hear and it distressed me even more. Today, I recall that conversation with much humility and appreciation. That advice was certainly not what I wanted to hear that night but most certainly what I needed to hear.

The fourth aspect of rationality is resisting pressure which I will address later.

I will only speak briefly on the fifth aspect of rationality – that of having and stating reasons for decisions. In my view, if a public official is not able to provide reasons for a decision, it is a good indication of the need to rethink that decision. The external dimension of this aspect is one we all know. When a public official exercises public power, they are obliged to explain the reasons for their decisions. This is essential for securing the trust of the people and they owe it to us because they exercise public power, on our behalf. It goes without saying that public officials and the public should know the difference between rational reasons and reasons which are disingenuous – reasons which seek to hide rather than reveal.

So, to sum up on the points I made about rationality, I highlighted five features of this attribute, being objective in decision-making, being limited and guided by the purpose for which discretionary power has been given, consulting and/or seeking honest and expert-based advice, resisting any pressure to be biased and recording reasons for decisions. (To be continued)

by Dinesha Samararatne

Professor, Dept of Public & International Law, Faculty of Law, University of Colombo, Sri Lanka and independent member, Constitutional Council of Sri Lanka (January 2023 to January 2026)



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Mannar’s silent skies: Migratory Flamingos fall victim to power lines amid Wind Farm dispute

Published

on

Victims: Flamingos / Birds found dead in Mannar

By Ifham Nizam

A fresh wave of concern has gripped conservationists following the reported deaths of migratory flamingos within the Vankalai Sanctuary—a globally recognised bird habitat—raising urgent questions about the ecological cost of large-scale renewable energy projects in the region.

The incident comes at a time when a fundamental rights petition, challenging the proposed wind power project, linked to India’s Adani Group, remains under examination before the Supreme Court, with environmental groups warning that the very risks they highlighted are now materialising.

At least two flamingos—believed to be part of the iconic migratory flocks that travel thousands of kilometres to reach Sri Lanka—were found dead after entanglement with high-tension transmission lines running across the sanctuary. Another bird was reportedly struggling for survival.

Professor Sampath Seneviratne, a leading ornithologist, expressed deep concern over the development, noting that such incidents are not isolated but indicative of a broader and predictable threat.

“These migratory birds depend on specific flyways that have remained unchanged for centuries. When high-risk infrastructure, like poorly planned power lines, intersect these routes, collisions become inevitable,” he said. “What we are witnessing now could be just the beginning if proper mitigation measures are not urgently implemented.”

Environmentalists argue that the Mannar region—particularly the Vankalai wetland complex—is one of the most critical stopover sites in South Asia for migratory waterbirds, including flamingos, pelicans, and various species of waders. The sanctuary’s ecological value has also supported a niche with growing eco-tourism sector, drawing birdwatchers from around the world.

Executive Director of the Centre for Environmental Justice, Dilena Pathragoda, said the incident underscores the urgency of judicial intervention and stricter environmental oversight.

“This tragedy is a direct consequence of ignoring scientifically established environmental safeguards. We have already raised these concerns before court, particularly regarding the location of transmission infrastructure within sensitive bird habitats,” Pathragoda said.

“Renewable energy cannot be pursued in isolation from ecological responsibility. If due process and proper environmental impact assessments are bypassed or diluted, then such losses are inevitable.”

Conservation groups have long cautioned that the installation of wind turbines and associated grid infrastructure—especially overhead transmission lines—within or near sensitive habitats could transform these landscapes into lethal zones for avifauna.

An environmental activist involved in the ongoing legal challenge said the latest deaths validate earlier warnings.

“This is exactly what we feared. Development is necessary, but not at the cost of biodiversity. When projects of this scale proceed without adequate ecological assessments and safeguards, the consequences are irreversible,” the activist stressed.

The debate has once again brought into focus the delicate balance between renewable energy expansion and biodiversity conservation. While wind energy is widely promoted as a clean alternative to fossil fuels, experts caution that “green” does not automatically mean “harmless.”

Professor Seneviratne emphasised that solutions do exist, including rerouting transmission lines, installing bird diverters, and conducting comprehensive migratory pathway studies prior to project approval.

“Globally, there are well-established mitigation strategies. The issue here is not the absence of knowledge, but the failure to apply it effectively,” he noted.

The timing of the incident is particularly worrying. Migratory flamingos typically remain in Sri Lanka until late April or May before embarking on their return journeys. Conservationists warn that if hazards remain unaddressed, larger flocks could face similar risks in the coming weeks.

Beyond ecological implications, experts also highlight potential economic fallout. Wildlife tourism—especially birdwatching—contributes significantly to local livelihoods in Mannar.

 Repeated reports of bird deaths could deter eco-conscious travellers and damage the region’s reputation as a safe haven for migratory species.

Environmentalists are now calling for immediate intervention by authorities, including a temporary halt to high-risk operations in sensitive zones, pending a thorough environmental review.

They stress that protecting animal movement corridors—whether elephant migration routes or avian flyways—is a fundamental pillar of modern conservation.

As the controversy unfolds, one question looms large: can Sri Lanka pursue sustainable energy without sacrificing the very natural heritage that defines it?

Pathragoda added that for now, the sight of fallen flamingos in Mannar stands as a stark reminder that development, if not carefully planned, can carry a heavy and irreversible cost.

Continue Reading

Features

‘Weaponizing’ religion in the pursuit of power

Published

on

President Donald Trump; miscalculating in M-E / Ayatollah Khomeini; Architect of Iranian Revolution

A picture of US President Donald Trump apparently being prayed for by supporters, appearing in sections of the international media, said it all loud and clear. That is, religion is being flagrantly leveraged or prostituted by politicians single-mindedly bent on furthering their power aspirations.

Although in the case of the US President the trend took on may be an exceptionally graphic or dramatic form, the ‘weaponizing’ of religion is nothing particularly new, nor is it confined to only religiously conservative sections of the West. For example, in South Asia it is an integral part of politics. The ‘South Asian Eight’ are notorious for it and it could be unreservedly stated that in Sri Lanka, the latter’s ethnic conflict would be more amenable to resolution if religion was not made a potent weapon by ambitious politicians of particularly the country’s South.

The more enlightened sections of Christian believers in the US may not have been able to contain their consternation at the sight of the US President apparently being ‘blessed’ by pastors claiming adherence to Christianity. Any human is entitled to be blessed but not if he is leading his country to war without exhausting all the options at his disposal to end the relevant conflict by peaceful means.

More compounded would be his problem if his directives lead to the death of civilians in the hundreds. In the latter case he is stringently accountable for the spilling of civilian blood, that is, the committing of war crimes.

However, the US along with Israel did just that in the recent bombings of Iran, for instance. The majority of the lives lost were those of civilians. If the US President is endowed with a Christian conscience he would have paused to consider that he is guilty of ordering the taking of the life of another human which is forbidden in the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Moreover, the ‘pastors’ praying over the US President should have thought on the above lines as well. May be they were in an effort to curry the President’s favour which is as blame-worthy as legitimizing in some form the taking of civilian lives. Apparently, the realisation is not dawning on all Christian conservatives of the US that some of these ‘pastors’ could very well be the proverbial false prophets and the latter are almost everywhere, even in far distant Sri Lanka.

However, the political reality ‘on the ground’ is that the Christian Right is a stable support base of the Republican Right in the US. Considering this it should not come as a surprise to the seasoned political watcher if the Christian Right, read Christian fundamentalists, are hand-in-glove, so to speak, with President Trump. But it is a scathing indictment on these rightist sections that they are all for perpetrating war and destruction and not for the fostering of peace and reconciliation. Ideally, they should have impressed on their President the dire need to make peace.

That said, political commentators should consider it incumbent on themselves to point out that religion is being ‘weaponized’ in Iran as well. Theocratic rule in Iran has been essentially all about perpetuating the power of the clerical class. The reasons that led to the Islamic Revolution in Iran are complex and the indiscreet Westernization of Iran under the Shah dynasty is one of these but one would have expected Iran to develop from then on into a multi-party, pluralistic democratic state where people would be enjoying their fundamental rights, as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, for example.

Moreover, Iran should have taken it upon itself to be a champion of world peace, in keeping with its Islamic credentials. But some past regimes in Iran had vowed to virtually bomb Israel out of existence and such regional policy trajectories could only bring perpetual conflict and war. Considering the current state of the Middle East it could be said that the unfettered playing out of these animosities is leading the region and the world to ‘reap the whirlwind’, having recklessly ‘sowed the wind’.

However, religious fundamentalism-inspired conflict and war has spread well beyond the Middle East into almost every region since 1979, the year of the Islamic Revolution in Iran. So much so, knowledgeable opinion now points out that religious identity has come to replace nationalism as a principal shaper of international politics or “geopolitics”, as quite a few sections misleadingly and incorrectly term it.

Elaborating on the decisive influence of religious identity, the well known and far traveled Western journalist Patrick Cockburn says in his authoritative and comprehensive book titled, ‘The Age of Jihad – Islamic State and the Great War for the Middle East’ at page 428 in connection with the war in Chechnya ; ‘If nationalism was not entirely dead, it no longer provided the ideological glue necessary to hold together and motivate people who were fighting a war. Unlike the Islamic faith, it was no longer a belief or a badge of identity for which people would fight very hard.’ (The book in reference was published by VERSO, London and New York).

In his wide coverage of Jihadist Wars the world over Cockburn goes on to state that today a call from a cleric could motivate his followers to lay down no less than their lives for a cause championed by the former. The 9/11 catastrophe alone should convince the observer that this is indeed true.

However, as often pointed out in this column, there is no alternative but to foster peace and reconciliation if a world free of bloodshed and strife is what is being sought. Fortunately we are not short of illustrious persons from the East and West who have shone a light on how best to get to a degree of peace. Besides Mahatma Gandhi of India, who was the subject of this column last week, we have former President of Iran Mohammad Khatami, who made a case for a ‘Dialogue of Civilizations’ rather than a ‘Clash of Civilizations’.

The time is more than ripe to take a leaf from these illustrious personalities, for, the current state of war in the Middle East has raised the possibility of a war that could transcend regional boundaries. The antagonists are obliged to exhaust all the peaceful options with the assistance of the UN system. Besides, war cannot ever have the blessings of the sane.

Continue Reading

Features

Venerable Rahula Thera’s 35-year green mission and national Namal Uyana

Published

on

Venerable Rahula Thera

It was 35 years ago, on March 28, 1991, that Venerable Rahula Thera, then a young monk, embarked on a journey to the Na forest in Ulpathagama, Palagama, in the Anuradhapura District. Today, three and a half decades later, this mission stands as living proof of the enduring bond between Buddhist philosophy and the natural world.

Marking the 35th year of this green mission, Rahula Thera’s relentless dedication has transformed the National Namal Uyana into an environmental landmark admired not only across Sri Lanka but around the globe, as well.

When studying the life of Venerable Rahula Thera, one cannot ignore the profound connection between Buddhism and the environment. Buddhism is a philosophy deeply attuned to nature. The historical use of the sacred “Na Ruka” by all four Buddhas: Mangala Buddha, Sumana Buddha, Revata Buddha, and Sobhita Buddha — for enlightenment —demonstrates that from time immemorial, Buddhism has maintained a sacred bond with the Na tree. From the birth of Siddhartha to his enlightenment, the propagation of the Dharma, and even the great Parinirvana, all of these milestones unfolded in verdant, living landscapes.

Venerable Rahula Thera did not embark on the Namal Uyana mission seeking government support or personal gain. His commitment sprang from a deep devotion to the Buddha’s teachings on grove cultivation. A grove cultivator is one who spreads compassion for nature. As the Vanaropa Sutta teaches:

Venerable Rahula Thera reclaimed Namal Uyana which was then under the control of timber smugglers and treasure hunters. The term “Wanawasi” does not merely mean living in a forest; it signifies finding rest and enlightenment through nature, free from the destructive roots of greed, sin, and delusion.

Another defining aspect of Venerable Rahula Thera’s 35-year mission is the purification of the human mind. He has consistently taught the thousands who visit Namal Uyana that a person who loves a tree will never harm another human being. As the Dhamma proclaims:

It is important to remember that Venerable Rahula Thera devoted his life, without fear, speaking the truth and taking necessary action, tirelessly advancing the national mission he began. From 1991 to the present, he has worked with every government elected by the people, maintaining impartiality and independence from political ideology. Yet, he never hesitated to raise his voice fearlessly against any individual, of any rank or party, who committed wrongdoing.

Religious and Social Mission

The National Namal Uyana is not merely a forest; it is a magnificent heritage site, dating back to ancient times. Scattered across the landscape are boundary walls, the remains of ancient monastery complexes, and stone carvings believed to date back to the reign of King Devanampiyatissa. In earlier centuries, this sacred land had served as a meditation sanctuary for hundreds of monks. The name “National Namal Uyana,” by which this ecological and archaeological treasure is known today, was introduced by Venerable Rahula Thera in 1991. The government’s later recognition of the site as the National Namal Uyana stands as a significant achievement for both religion and national heritage.

Venerable Rahula Thera is a monk who has lived a life of renunciation. A striking example of this is his decision not to assume the position of Chief Incumbent of the National Namal Uyana Viharaya, instead entrusting the temple to the Ramanna Nikaya and its trustees. In doing so, he set a precedent for the contemporary Sangha. The Thera himself stated that he was merely the trustee of Namal Uyana, not its owner.

Legacy and Continuing Inspiration

The 35th anniversary of Venerable Wanawasi Rahula Thera’s arrival at Namal Uyana is not merely the commemoration of a period of time; it is a message of nature to future generations. Through his work, the Thera revived the ancient Hela tradition of loving trees and venerating the environment as something sacred. This religious and environmental mission remains unforgettable.

The revival experienced by Namal Uyana, after the arrival of Venerable Wanawasi Rahula Thera, is beyond simple description. Some of the major accomplishments achieved under his leadership include:

* Securing and protecting the largest Rose Quartz (Rosa Thirivana) reserve in South Asia.

* Restoring the Na forest spread across hundreds of acres, providing shelter to numerous rare plants and animal species.

* Transforming the area into a living centre for environmental education, offering practical learning experiences for thousands of schoolchildren and university students.

* Drawing the attention of world leaders and international environmentalists to Sri Lanka’s unique environmental heritage.

In recognition of his immense contribution to environmental conservation, Venerable Rahula Thera was honoured with the Presidential Environment Award and the Green Award in 2004—a significant moment in his life. Yet the Thera himself has always remained devoted to the work rather than the recognition it brings, making such appreciation even more meaningful.

Continue Reading

Trending